Case Number: 09-0268

53 results
  • April 19, 2010

    April 16, 2010

    Acting Chairman Manuel Flores
    Commissioner Lula Ford
    Commissioner Erin O’Connell-Diaz
    Commissioner Sherman Elliott
    Acting Commissioner John Colgan
    Illinois Commerce Commission
    527 East Capitol Avenue
    Springfield, IL 62701

    Dear Acting Chairman Flores, Commissioners Ford, O’Connell-Diaz, Elliott, and Acting Commissioner Colgan:

    In the face of our protracted national recession, one of my top priorities as Governor of Illinois is to create jobs.

    As Chairman of the Illinois Broadband Deployment Council, one of my related, long-standing goals is to improve the cost, speed and availability of world-class information and communication networks in rural, low-income, and disadvantaged communities. That’s why as Governor I have advocated aggressively for State investment in Illinois’ broadband future.

    The “Illinois Jobs NOW!” public works plan, signed into law last July, designates $50 million for State financial commitments to seed the growth of exceptional broadband infrastructure projects. In the interest of smart planning, it also calls on Illinois Departments of Transportation and Central Management Services to install fiber optic duct (where it does not already exist) in all new public construction projects that open, bore, or trench alongside State-owned infrastructure.

    Of course, I also believe that broadband network investments made possible by the private telecommunications industry will hasten innovation in education, government, public safety, health care, economic and community development in Illinois. Frontier Telecommunication’s proposed acquisition of Verizon’s Illinois territory offers a real chance for meaningful jobs and growth in the Illinois economy.

    To the extent that an expansion of Frontier’s footprint in Illinois represents potential job and broadband expansion opportunities, I urge the Commission to give a careful and comprehensive review of the Frontier acquisition. Especially in these economic times, we should promote and facilitate investments in technology and telecommunications progress that will create jobs in Illinois and will provide opportunities and access to our rural, low-income, and disadvantaged communities.

    I appreciate the magnitude and stakes of your review in this case and I am grateful for the chance to offer these comments. Thank you for your time, your service, and your thoughtful consideration.


    Pat Quinn

    Pat Quinn
  • April 1, 2010

    I'm opposed to the sale with out full disclosure being made and long out standing troubles corrected. This needs to be proven that the trouble has been repaired and the customers are getting what they pay for.
    Examples is the wire line service should provide continued service without the benefit of the Electric utility for some extended time. I continue to have the same re-occurring problem over several years. Why would upper management not catch repair this problem or is it easier to sell the bad stuff to Frontier Communications.
    Another Example was some years ago I worked for a major business that was a major user of GTE/Verizon lines. I learned that my service would be sub-standard following seeing a particular technician working in the area. I would check most the circuits before leaving work and report the problems. When that fellow retired I again had a normal system.
    For now my problem continues and has went beyond 3 strikes your out. Yesterday was strike number five in less than 4 years.
    Again I'm opposed to any sale or transfer of territory that will live live up to the expectations of service that the customer has paid for in advance. What antique equipment is being sold that parts are not available??

    Clayton Brunner
  • March 26, 2010

    Please "ensure "that safe, reliable, and fairly priced telephone service" that meets the "present and future needs of Illinois consumers and businesses."" (The CUB Voice; Winter 2010) I use Verizon because this issue came about when "Ma Bell" was split-up, MCI could not deliver good service, so back I went, and to higher service rates. Sincerely, Lipscomb
    Jimmy Lipscomb
  • March 22, 2010

    We are highly in favor of Frontier taking over our land line service from Verizon.

    We had significant difficulty in establishing our land line service when we moved into Verizon's service area last summer. Verizon's web site is difficult to use, and getting a live person on the phone is nearly impossible. When we finally did get service, it didn't work. When we finally were able to get a service man to our house, he told us the problem was in our house wiring. As an electrical engineer, I know enough about phone service that I was able to prove to him that the problem was in Verizon's line. It took almost a week after that for Verizon to get the line working.

    We believe Verizon concentrates on its wireless services and is no longer interested in providing good land line services.

    We would like to have high speed internet service in our home and Verizon does not offer it. Frontier has indicated that expanding high speed internet would be one of their efforts.

    Please allow our phone service to be sold to a company that wants to provide good, up-to-date services to our area.

    Thank you.

    Mark and Jennifer Baron
  • March 19, 2010

    Emails and information has been provided to Judge Tapia and many others on the service list to provide the following details.

    Verizon has knowingly and purposely allowed tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of current and former employees to work with and use carbonless copy paper, ccp, they knew could cause serious adverse health effects, disabilities, cancer and death. Verizon, going back to Bell Atlantic, BA, have known of the potential for such adverse health problems going back to the early 90's. Verizon, BA had suspected ccp as causing adverse health problems in several offices. They had been in contact with manufactuers of the ccp , gotten a list of some of the carcinogens, reproductive toxins, hazardous chemicals used in the ccp as well as a long list of information, research on the potential for adverse health effects from use and exposure to the ccp. Corporate warnings were prepared to give to all employees of such knonw potential adverse health effects. Instead of giving such warnings, sick and disabled employees have been fired, forced to retire, denied disabilities and all other benefits. This to save money from disability , workers comp and other related claims. Apparently it became financially better for employees to be allowed to become sick and disabled, allow birth defects for children and untold numbers die rather than pay any associated claims. Now there is no way to tell how many of the hundreds of thousands of current and former employees may be affected.
    A lot of employees on social sites are saying they have known adverse health effects and can likely file claims against Verizon. In addition, there is a growing list of employees that claim Verizon and a company they have hired are tricking them into giving up retirements and other benefits they are on and instead tricking Social Security into paying benefits for employees.
    Now, Verizon is aware that litigation is expected to be filed against them shortly that could involve thousands of employees and cost hundreds of millions or more in related losses. This could leave a shortage of employees and great losses for both Verizon and possibly Frontier. All corporate officers and others of Verizon, Frontier and many others that are aware of all these and many other related facts. Both seem to be secreting such information for review before the sale of Verizon is made to Frontier.

    I will be glad to providing more details to anyone and will be making a formal filing to this case., corporate counsel 212-395-1284 or cell 202-494-9054 can confirm allegations and copies of docements provided.

    Brenda Smith

    Brenda Smith
  • March 12, 2010

    The ICC staff and ALJ. Tapia should be commended in doing due diligence in this case. The proposed order is right and should be upheld as is by the commissioners. The evidence shows that Frontier Communications at this time is not financially sound enough to take on the added burden of Verizon's customers and Employees. The chance for harm to both and to the State of Illinois IF Frontier is not able to meet the promises they have made for better and expanded service, the "Synergies" they HOPE to have , and the projections that may never happen makes this a right decision at this time. At such time Frontier can better their financial position and have investment grade status then and only then a different decision could be arrived at.
    Name Withheld
  • March 11, 2010

    I live in Rantoul which is serviced by Verizon. I have no concern regarding the sale of these Verizon properties to Frontier. Verizon is unloading properties they no longer have a desire to serve. Do you think for one minute they are going to invest in these communities, if so I have a good idea how you voted in the election.
    I worked for the local phone company before it was Verizon, actually well before. I saw the company change hands becoming Alltel and never experienced a decrease in service until Verizon took over. They cut the workforce nearly in half, decreased the number of outside plant employees and service related employees effectively taking an adequate service to one which remains poor on the best days. Now comes a company who desires to be in the landline business and will commit to improving service and everyone is against this. Take off the rose colored glasses folks. Verizon does not want to be in the landline business, they will not improve service for landline customers and regardless of all political positioning no Government agency can force them to improve. What is the State of Illinois going to do take over the phone company?
    If you think keeping Verizon will keep union jobs in place you need a reality check.
    Go with someone who wants to provide you service they at least will make a commitment.

    Mike Runyon
  • March 11, 2010

    From Billing and OSS magazine:

    Frontier Is No FairPoint
    03/10/2010 11:59

    Let’s get one thing clear: Frontier Communications is no FairPoint. FairPoint was ill-prepared, overambitious, inexperienced and in denial when it relentlessly pursued the acquisition of 1.3 million access lines from Verizon so it could become the eighth largest telco in the U.S. Unfortunately, it succeeded, then proceeded to fail ... spectacularly.

    As a result, Frontier is now getting extra scrutiny in its bid to acquire 4.8 million more of Verizon’s local access lines across 14 states. And this week Judge Lisa M. Tapia in Illinois – a state with the legislative and fiscal bragging rights of a third-world country – has decided Frontier would take on too much debt to allow it to properly manage those lines and other infrastructure and has advised state regulators not to approve the deal.

    First of all, no one from Illinois should be lecturing anyone on operating with too much debt. The only reason someone from Illinois steps forward and takes the moral high ground to protect its helpless citizens is because they haven’t gotten theirs yet. That, or they’ve been watching Washington and learned how lucrative it could be to be the last holdout.

    If Judge Tapia or CUB executive director David Kolata or the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers are looking at the FairPoint debacle as a precursor to what might happen with a Frontier acquisition, they should let it go.

    FairPoint was founded in 1991. It was still a tiny company in September of 2006 when it began contemplating its future among the big boys and the lure of taking on another 1.3 million access lines and 234,000 high-speed data subscribers. Why, by then it had already grown to a whopping 252,000 access lines. It was more of an investment firm than a phone company and did underestimate the operational and financial challenge of supporting a much bigger – and much older – network.

    Frontier is under no such delusions. Frontier is run by more level-headed and frugal business leaders backed by a team of experienced core and access networking and operations experts with a legacy that goes back to the 1880s with Rochester Telephone Corporation. Not everyone in these days of the Internet views the long legacy of a telephone company as an asset, but when it comes to operating 4.8 million traditional copper pairs in diverse geographic markets, I’d lay my money on a telephone legacy over an investment company any day.

    The Communications Workers of America has cited customer satisfaction surveys that show Frontier ranked far below Verizon in places such as West Virginia for its broadband service, but Verizon won’t be investing in these facilities – Frontier will. And Frontier, on average, covers a larger percentage of customers with broadband. It is easy to score high when you only serve customers to whom you can deliver the highest bandwidth.

    It tugs at my heart strings to hear so many leaders in Illinois concerned over the quality of our “utility” telephone service. It really does.

    Robert LaBonte
  • March 11, 2010

    sale to frontier not a good deal for frontier or illinois .verizon is all about making money . right now they are acting like a very very shaddy cars sales person . right now verizon is denying some customer s in pontiac il hsi just because they dont want to buy the central office card to stick in the vacant card slot. there is existing hsi at this location and available slots for the hsi card but verizon doesnot want to buty them . there are miles and miles of bad osp and miles of wire on the ground in the osp . they have came to the central offices and have acctually taken out phone switches and bays to store in a verizon location on the east coast this was all done after the frontier walk through . behind there back . icc should not approve unless they are forced to put billions of dollars restoring the osp to acceptable standards and expanding hsi to rural areas and actually try to get land line customers and not drive them away with empty promises or lies.verizon makes it employees lie about time sheets and repairs everyday just to make the numbers look good not caring at all about customer satisfaction they just want to blame the outside plant problems on some one else. AND WHY WOULDNT VERIZON PAY OUT THE PENSION PLANS TO THE EMPLOYEES SINCE FRONTIER DOESNOT EVEN HAVE ONE .MY RELATIVES WIFE WORKS FOR A BANK AND ITHAS CHANGED NAMES 3 TIMES IN LAST 5 YRS. EVERYTIME SHE GETS A OPTION TO TRANSFER HER PENSION TO THE NEW BANK , OR ROLL IT OVER INTO A IRA OR OTHER RETIREMENT ACCOUNT VERIZON EMPLOYEES NEED THIS OPTION .
  • March 11, 2010

    not a good deal for illinois or employees,verizons plan is to bankrupt froniter in about 7 yrs .WITH THE EXPANSION OF THE 700 MHZ BANDWIDTH they have bought. also where is frontier getting all the money to buy verizon and expand hsi r they borrowing it .maybe the government is giving them some if so then why hasnt verizon asked the government for money for hsi . also frontier said it plans to expand hsi to reach 85 percent of vz customers i thought there was a law passed a few years ago in illinois requiring it to be 85 percent .also verizon has not upgraded any osp in years they have wires runningon the ground for yrs hoping the customers just go to cell phones so they dont have to spend money on replacing cable to give the customer service .verizon customer service reps are even trying to sell or push these customers to wireless cell phones .also this is a sale verizon should pay out all the pensions to the employees affected and not give them to frontier so they can spend it frontier doesnt even have a pension plan why should they bet to handle it .this is very unfair . also verizon and frontier both manipulate the numbers to make them look good or bad however they want them to look . bottom line in 5 yrs verizon plans to renter illinois selling dial tone and hsi and possible tv with there 700 mhz analog signal that they bought . this signal travels through walls and is very reliable ..oh ya rember that the big corporations told the government that that old 700 mhz used for tv broadcast was out of date and was no good anymore or used by anyone that everyone needs to switch to digital tv .because it is better (not). better for what i ask it for a picture that freezes and cuts out if u ask any one they would be glad to switch back to the analog signal . why did they want u to switch to digital just to big corporation s see money and that is it that is a strong signal that works through walls and trees and travels a lot farther than cell phone tower s do today but wait a minute cell phone towers are digital . it just proves analog is better but it is to cheap or set up by government not to make money so that is why they are pushing digital to make analog obsolete so they can by it for nothing and reinvent it and are free to charge what ever they want for it .
    rodney billerbeck
  • March 5, 2010

    I am opposed to Frontier buying Verizon phone company. they are a small company and out East thier Company had to take bankrupcty and if that happened here it might affect alot of customers. I am opposed to this.
    Carol Randall
  • March 2, 2010

    Case No. 09-0268
    March 1, 2010
    I live within the city limits of Springfield, Illinois and have a Verizon land line. The Verizon underground lines to my house are only 14 years old and therefore the latest equipment technology, I assume. However, no DSL internet connection is available with Verizon. Frontier Communications, who wants to purchase the Verizon territory said that they want to create a "pure rural communications service."

    Since I live in the city of Springfield with 110,000 people I don't want rural communication services, I want urban communication services that can provide a DSL internet connection and reasonable telephone rates. About 95% of of the people within the city limits of Springfield have AT&T land line phone service, which also provides DSL internet service. The basic Verizon telephone line charge and interstate access charges are $7.78 more a month than AT&T with no DSL internet service. Apparently you pay Verizon more, for less service.

    I realize that changing boundary lines for utility companies is highly unusual and that some people would say that AT&T has a monopoly on the telephone system in Illinois. However, if Frontier Communications wants to be a rural communication service, let them serve the rural population and let AT&T serve the urban population. I don't think it would be an unreasonable request for the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) and the telephone/communications companies to reevaluate their territory boundaries every 50 years and to allow these companies to realign the boundaries among each other in order to better reflect the current municipal boundaries and to provide those communities with better communications services in an economical manner. Obviously those companies that would give up territory would have to be compensated fairly.

    It would be an ideal time for AT&T to be allowed to purchase Verizon's territory within the Springfield city limits during the ICC's approval process of this particular case involving Verizon selling their territory to Frontier Communications. I suggest to the ICC that they allow AT&T to purchase Verizon/Frontier territory within the Springfield city limits for the appropriate amount in order to provide better and cheaper service while providing continuity in the city of Springfield with one telephone company.

    James E. Harms
  • March 1, 2010

    As a owner of a software billing company in Champaign, I would like to go on record as supporting the sale of landlines from Verizon to Frontier. If this sale goes through, our current company's role with Frontier will grow tremendously. We currently employ 96 people in Champaign County and this additional business will allow us to continue to grow and potentially add new employees. I am also a former COO of a telecom company in SC and can tell you that Frontier is very capable of handling the current network configurations. There would be no noticeable difference in the quality of service moving from Verizon to Frontier.
    Robert LaBonte
  • February 26, 2010

    I oppose this sale! I fear that the smaller company will not be able to provide the quality of service that I have come to expect from Verizon. The service will deteriorate.


    Arlene Zielke
  • February 26, 2010

    Please note that we are completely against the Verizon-Frontier deal. The Fair Point deal was a loser (I know, we lost big), and we don't need this.
    RAY & CAROL Borowski
  • February 22, 2010

    Customer called concerned about dependable phone service, and doesn't want for the phone-service take over to happen. Customer states that there have been dependability issues with Verizon in the past, and is very concerned that service reliability will go down again if this take-over is permitted to happen.
    Lois Witt
  • February 1, 2010

    I have looked at the financial information of Frontier Communications and have concluded that it looks to me that their net worth has decreased by half or more since 12/2005. They are paying a 12-13% dividend to their shareholders which is nice if you can afford it. My feelings is that they need a revenue stream to survive. I hope the ICC is looking into this aspect of the deal. States appear to be putting conditions to benefit themselves, how will these conditions work if Frontier continues to lose asset value and becomes compromised financially. I am not sure they have done due diligence on what they are buying and suggestions that Verizon not being able to just take the money and run and somehow keeping skin in the game so to speak may help Frontier survive and maybe prosper.
    Randy Alloway
  • February 1, 2010

    I am concerned about Frontier's proposed acquisition of Verizon's rural landlines. As a resident and Village Trustee of Broadlands, a rural village of about 300 people in southeastern Champaign County, I am concerned for several reasons.
    First, I share the questions of others regarding Frontier's ability to continue providing telecommunication services after incurring the debt required to purchase the lines from Verizon. If Frontier were to become economically distressed, or even bankrupt, what would happen to our service?
    Second, will the prices customers pay for telephone service increase as a result of this deal? Customers pay high prices for telephone service already. Basic telephone service is about $30 per month.
    Third, I am concerned about additional services. Verizon's website advertises several high-speed internet options and even television service. However, in our Village, there are no land-based broadband internet options. Some residents are situated such that satellite internet is available, but those customers pay exorbitant monthly fees (and installation charges as well) for services which have been described as unreliable and slow. Those satellite customers are typically locked into service contracts with hefty cancellation fees, regardless of the reason for cancellation (like sporadic service). In more urban areas, and even in some rural towns nearby, residents have more internet options, like DSL, cable, even fiber optic, for more reasonable monthly rates. I question whether Frontier would be able to provide our village with quality, reasonably-priced internet service. Indeed, Verizon has been unwilling to do so. Furthermore, Verizon does not even offer dial-up internet in our village, and further stipulates in its home long-distance policy that service may be terminated at Verizon's discretion if it is discovered that long-distance is being used for data reception (as in dial-up internet). Indeed, I contacted Verizon a year ago to inquire about having a T1 internet line run to our village, to supply our village hall and other buildings with a dedicated internet conenction. Verizon refuses to deal with our village on the issue. We are tired of being left out -- Verizon apparently will not install an internet line even if our village paid for it -- and Frontier's economic status would seem to make it more unlikely that we will ever see high-speed internet here in Broadlands.
    I look forward to seeing how our concerns are addressed by Frontier, Verizon, and the Commission.
    Brian Pondenis
    Broadlands, Illinois

    Brian Pondenis
  • February 1, 2010

    Until Verizon is required to repair all the damaged boxes and lines they should not be allowed to sell their land lines to anyone. I would be happy to provide pictures to the commission of what I am talking about. I gave up trying to have a land line along time ago because I could never count on it. The only person who was ever able to ge my phone working was an outside contractor sent when Verizon could not repair my line. He told me the real problems with my line and the transmission line also.

    Verizon Wireless on the other hand is an excellent company providing the best and most reliable service across the midwest and eastern seaboard. I can't speak for the rest of the country as I have not used my phone there.

    Bryan Trail
  • February 1, 2010

    Moving service from Verizon to Frontier in my estimation will diminish the quality of phone service. Frontier does not have the resources to duplicate that of Verizon. It is for this reason I think service will deteriorate.
  • February 1, 2010

    I oppose this sale! I fear that the smaller company will not be able to provide the quality of service that I have come to expect from Verizon. The service will deteriorate.
    Charles M LeCrone
  • February 1, 2010

    These smaller companies cannot hope to provide comparable service to Verizon. Verizon's current customers have signed up for the service Verizon alone can provide with the service network (including towers, call centers, a repair fleet of considerable size, etc.) which Verizon alone possesses. Transferring these customers' service to an inferior carrier is, in every instance, a breach of contract and therefore unethical business.
    Rev. Matthew R. Stolz
  • February 1, 2010

    I am very much against the sale of my landline to Frontier Communications. Verizon has a terrible service record in our area (partially due to severely deteriorated lines and equipment) and, with a much smaller company like Frontier, the service can only get worse. Frontier is simply not equipped with the employees, funds, experience, and technical support experience (to mention a few but not all reasons) to effectively service our basic needs. Verizon has "milked" our phone system for profit and not reinvested in the basic equipment and/or lines to maintain the system. It is a farce to expect and small company like Frontier to correct what Verizon failed or refused to do. I have cancer and very much depend on my landline to contact physicians and emergency personel. Please refuse to sanction this sale and thereby force Verizon to face up to their long-neglected responsibility to it's consumers. Thank you.
    Jacquelyn S. White
  • February 1, 2010

    Frontier is to small of a company to handle such a load. I have had Frontier in the area where I live a they have more problems than most. Bad ideal leave things alone.
    Kenneth W. Diez
  • February 1, 2010

    Reliable and established communication modes are critical to the everyday function of families and commerce. The proposed sale of Verizon south lines to a company ill equipped to sustain competent and reliable service is contrary to the function of society in this and other areas of the country. I urge you to give careful and non-financially related consideration to this request.
    Mark Cosgrove
  • February 1, 2010

    I do not feel Verizon/Frontier deal should go through.
    Verizon currently has awesome customer service, both on the phone and in their stores.
    I have dealt with Frontier in the past, nothing good about them.
    Thank You

    G. G.
  • February 1, 2010

    I do not have confidence that such a small company as Frontier has the management skill or expertise to effectively handle an expansion of this size. I would've NEVER renewed my contract if I had been aware of this possiblility.
    Xanthe Emerick
  • February 1, 2010

    I strongly oppose the conversion of Verizon service to Frontier service.

    Frontier is, so far as I know, a company that has never done business in this
    area, so we have little confidence that service will be up to standard.
    We already have some disappointment with Verizon. For 2 months a
    year, we live in a house outside Estes Park, CO. And there we get
    no Verizon service. No one can call in. For outgoing calls, when we
    think it worthwhile, we have to drive 2 miles down the mountain to get
    service. Accordingly we have to put in a landline for 2 months and
    pay fees and installation charge and use the Verizon phone as a
    So not being fully satisfied as things are now, we would be strongly
    opposed to a change which might further reduce the value of our
    Verizon contract.

    Virginia H. Atkins
  • February 1, 2010

    I do not have any confidence that such a small company as Frontier has the management skill, expertise, or equipment necessary to effectively handle an expansion of this size. I am unsure if this particular acquisition would affect me directly (I do have Verizon cell phone service) but am sure it would AT LEAST effect me if I travel into the area that Frontier wishs to aquire.

    I have Verizon cell phone service because their coverage and equipment to provide said coverage is exceptionally good. It took me a lot of years (I come from the 'bag-phone' era) to find a service that truly provided for my means. I fear that this requested reorganization would truly diminish my current success in that area.

    I truly believe that a Verizon-Frontier merger would be bad for Illinois.

    Thank you for listening.

    Laura Wilson
  • February 1, 2010

    Verizon should not be allowed to sell it's land line phone service. For several years it has made service and repair more difficult to obtain in what I believe is an effort to discourage hard wire phone service and build their cell business. This decline began when General telephone became this company called Verizon. Allowing them to divest themselves of what they think is now a nuisance network after the profits from that system allowed them to build their cell network would be obcene betrayal to all Verizon (GenTel) ccustomers who still have serious need off a land line for dial-up and fax and basic phone communication. Should the elderly who are not and will not embrace cellphone techknowlegy be forced to be subjected to inferior service from some tiny unknown company that is probaly aquiring the wired service from Verizon to earn enough revenue to expand it's own entrance into the cellphone market. How will a smaller company, unheard of in all of the current verizon territory be able to provide reliable service and repair? Do they now have the personnel ready to take over this vast network and provide repair and maintenance? I totally reject the idea of a smaller unknown taking over my phone service at 217-832-9715. This is on it's face a scam by Verizon to abandon the customers that paid for Verizon's success in the cellphone market.
    Fred A Morrisette
  • February 1, 2010

    We had a local phone company then Frontier bought them out. In the beginning everything was fine but as time went along everything went downhill. It tooks days to get service, their people were not the best, our local office closed so you got the old call a number then talk to a machine. They added internet and like the phone at first it was good but went downhill. The their dialup was very slow and they're so called faster service was not much better and both were very unreliable. A 5th grader knew more about how the net or a pc worked and how to install then their people. They had no cell service of anykind. Most people have dropped their hardline service in favor of more reliable cell companies with only local buisnesses being their major landline customers. In short their people, services and company get a grade of D most most of our residents and past customers.
    david thomas
  • February 1, 2010

    I oppose the selling of Verizon lines to Frontier because having seen how poorly Frontier takes care of its lines and does not spend much on improving what they have, I think customers will get a poor deal.
    Michael Lampson
  • February 1, 2010

    I OPPOSE the merger of Frontier and Verizion, with my account as a Verizon cell phone customer being sold to a much smaller company.

    I am not confident about their abilities relative to service connectivity, ability to handle technical issues, or their level of customer service.

    Please do not allow this merger to proceed.
    Thank you,
    Theresa P. Paulin

    Theresa P Paulin
  • February 1, 2010

    Please allow Verizon to sell. They are a no responsive to the needs of local rural customers.


  • February 1, 2010

    I do not have believe that Frontier can effectively handle an such a large expansion.
  • February 1, 2010

    To anticipate that a small company such as Frontier Communications Corporation can handle such a sizable growth without causing significant problems for the customers is unrealistic. The issue really comes down to how it has been shown historically that such a merger is bad for the customers. This merger is inappropriate and should not be approved.
    David Moyer
  • January 15, 2010

    I urge the commision to approve the sale of Illinois access lines to Frontier Communications without delay: Verizon has no interest in Illinois other than a revenue source from which to drain assests and use them to fund expansions in densely populated states, such as New York for the expressed purposes of delivering FIOS.

    I am appauled that the public, Unions and Commission would wait to raise concerns about this matter after I was forced for more than 5 years (as a Verizon Employee) to work excessive overtime due to severe staff cuts in Illinois operations; heretofore there was no concern or outcry to the lack of funding by Verizon.

    Ivan Seidenberg, Verizon's CEO, has told business investors that "landlines are dead." What does the public, Unions and Commission think that Verizon will do if they are left holding Illinois?

    It would be a welcome change to have a phone ompany in Illinios who wants to be a 'phone company' and is serious about exanding broadband serices in under-served areas.

    Sean R Troutner
    Service Tech, Verizon, Marion IL
    IBEW local 702

    Sean R Troutner
  • November 6, 2009

    We are Verizon customers and are concerned about Frontiers capability to handle the rural lines operated now by Verizon. Our understanding of Frontier is that they aren't capable of caring for the customers they have now. I would advise to take a long, hard look before allowing them to take on more customer.
    Sincerely, Marshall Sancken

    Marshall Sancken
  • November 6, 2009

    Please vote against the aforementioned proposal. Americans are in dire need of protection from decisions resulting in financial loss for the individual and family.
    Karen Hopkins
  • November 6, 2009

    I am against Verizon Communications, Inc being able to sell their access lines to Frontier Communications Corporation.
    judy marcoline
  • November 6, 2009

    After reading this posting by CUB, i feel compelled to protest
    the Verizon-Frontier deal.:

    The proposed sale of 4.8-million Verizon access lines to Frontier raises numerous public interest concerns as to Frontier's ability to succeed where several previous Verizon divestitures have proven to be major trainwrecks," Boston-based telecom expert Lee Selwyn said in an introduction to his testimony. "Frontier has failed to demonstrate that its senior management have either the experience or the focus to successfully run the proposed Illinois operations."

    Stephen Paul Reynolds
  • November 6, 2009

    Verizon has never or never will offer any kind of high speed internet service (DSL).

    I switched to Comcast when Comcast offered 'Comcast Triple Play'.

    Verizons phone bills were outrageous! On top of that Verizon shut off my phone service before I was switched over to Comcast. They claimed that Comcast was responsible. I found out differently.

    As far as I'm concerned let 'Frontier' buy them out!!!

    Robert O'Neil
  • November 3, 2009

    I adamantly oppose the sale of Verizon Communications to Frontier Communications.
    Please vote against such sale.

    Raymond M Bartle Jr
  • November 3, 2009

    I am opposed the the sale of Verizon lines in Illinois to Frontier. I feel that given the dubious history of previous Verizon sales to similar small companies that service quality and pricing will only suffer. I do not have confidence that such a small company as Frontier has the management skill or expertise to effectively handle an expansion of this size. Likewise given the increasing competitive pressure that comes from cellular and DSL phone service Frontier will not be able to survive. Land lines are still a very important communication service especially for our senior citizens who need that connection for their protection and safety. I strongly encourage the commission to deny this sale.
    Kevin Heid
  • November 3, 2009

    Verizon service in Illinois is excellent now. Selling local lines could potentially hurt approximately 600,000 Illinois customers. I am against the sale!
    Patricia L. Amdor
  • November 3, 2009

    As stated by Lee Selwyn, this sale should not be approved unless Verizon is required to keep its stock in Frontier for at least five years so the company will be forced to support Verizon and its management until Frontier is able to provide stable, high-quality service.
  • November 3, 2009

    I am writing to oppose the sale of Verizon local land lines to Frontier Communications. Frontier appears to have limited financial capacity to honor the current phone rates, and will likely be under great pressure to increase rates. Furthermore, I am greatly concerned as to what might happen to my local phone service if Frontier were later to file bankruptcy, as we have seen with other Verizon transactions. I note that AT&T land lines are not available in my area, so the financial stability of my local land line company is very important.

    Verizon has benefitted for many years with a local phone monopoly in my community, and the revenue from Verizon land lines (formerly GTE) served as seed money for the highly profitable Verizon cell phone service.

    Joseph List
  • November 3, 2009

    I currently have Verizon North as my landline carrier. I recently changed to a new lower cost plan and it seems like I will like it (except it still costs too much). What will happen to my plan and costs if this sale goes through? I am retired on a fixed income and am concerned about the costs.
    Ronald Wood
  • November 3, 2009

    Just what we need ,another utility to raise its prices.Verizon was bad enough,they didn't back me up or help me when extra charges was put on my bill.This Frontier is unknown,if it happens I'll go to a cell phone..Let them sink, they don't worry about the seniors
    Bertha Hoffert
  • November 3, 2009

    I have moved to TN and already am on the fringes of Verizon service. My account is in IL. I have cancelled most of my Verizon service, but what will it do to my Broadband and Cellular services? Will my contracts still be in force? Will I continue to pay for poor service?
    Georgia Hoskins
  • November 3, 2009

    Please do not let this deal go thru, this will only hurt Illinois customers,A small company can't take care of tis many customers and them get good phone service, people in Illinois can't afford any more costs added to their bills. My father lives alone at 92 , and barely getting by, this is his choice , his independence . he can't afford more bills and he needs good phone service to call for help if needed, please watch out for our residents.
    sharon krack
  • November 3, 2009

    I urge th Commission not to approve the sale of Verizon's sale of it's telephone services to Frontier Communications UNLESS the following guarantees are provided. 1. No rate increases for residential services greater than the rate of inflation. 2. A commitment to provide DSL or similar high-speed Internet access to all premises in the service is made with penalties for non-performance.
    Joseph Rosner
  • October 16, 2009

    I'm concerned about the proposed Verizon sale to Frontier of Verizon's rural lines. My research indicates that customers in other states where this sale has happened have not been pleased with their resulting service. Degraded service and and more outages with both voice and DSL lines are frequent complaints. Please don't approve this sale.
    Dave Moyer